G A Builder arm of RNA Corp. Cheats senior citizen Murlidhar Prabhu age 85 He is homeless for last 12 years since he gave his home for redevelopment to RNA corp. The Builder is not giving rent nor constructing the building he is at the fag end of his life, He filled a complaint in RERA for relief but got highly disappointed as RERA did not gave order in his favor nor gave any relief and he was advised to approach High Court as RERA can give relief to only new home buyers and not the existing members of redevelopment project this a big drawback of RERA I request PM Narendra Modi and CM Devendra Fadnavis to amend the act to incorporate provision for original members of redevelopment project and not tolet them at the mercy of Builders.

The buyers claim that RNA Corp has been delaying handing over possession of apartments at Kalina complex for seven years

The Economic Offences Wing of the Mumbai police have filed an FIR against a leading property developer for allegedly duping over 150 buyers.The complainants have alleged that the directors of RNA Corp and its associates have interminably delayed handing over possession of apartments booked by them at the developer's project in Kalina in 2010.The buyers claim that they have already paid around 70% of the money for apartments at RNA Address that were priced between Rs 1.5 crore and Rs 3 crore.

The builder, they said, had initially promised them possession in 2014, but has been delaying the handover claiming to have failed to acquire necessary permissions from the BMC. According to the buyers, in March 2013, after completing the third slab, the builder informed them that work would remain suspended until additional approvals were obtained within a few months.Further enquiries over the next couple of years, right until last year, were deflected by the builder, who kept blaming the civic body for taking time to grant approvals. Earlier this year, some of the exasperated buyers made enquiries with bodies such as MHADA and MCGM about the status of the project, and said they were surprised to find that RNA had not made certain payments with respect to the pending approvals.

Pradeep Banerjee, a director at an MNC, who has brought three apartments in the complex, told Mirror that the buyers were tired of RNA's excuses. “Every time we approach the builder he comes up with some excuse or the other. All promises made by the builder have been proven to be fake.“ Ashish Verma, another buyer, claimed that the police were delaying taking action against the builder. “Earlier the FIR was registered with Kherwadi police, and now EOW has filed the FIR on the same complaint. It's been four days since the FIR has been registered and no action has been taken. Instead of arresting the accused, the cops are asking for original documents from us.All these are delaying tactics.“ The delay in the handover of the flats, said advocate Ameet Mehta, who is representing the buyers, was severely inconveniencing several of them. “It's been seven years, and many buyers are senior citizens.“

An EOW official, involved in the investigations, said, “The scam could involve over Rs 100 crore. Statements are being recorded and suitable action will be taken soon.“

Anubhav Agarwal, a director at RNA, said “These are people with malicious intentions. We had moved court also because of such intentions. The delay in the project was due to us not getting permissions on time. The court is yet to pass an order on the same. The case is subjudice. Meanwhile, we can't understand how the cops can file a case against us. We will challenge the same in court.“

An FIR (90/2017) has been lodged at Bandra's Kherwadi Police station, against a developer on charges of delaying redevelopment of buildings located at Kole Kalyan, Kalina in Santacruz (East) and keeping 67 allottees on tenterhooks for nearly a decade despite collecting nearly Rs 87 crore from them towards the cost of the flats.

The FIR was lodged on April 19, 2017 by Police Sub Inspector Jashri Sangle, based on the complaint of a 72-year-old allottee Clifford Menezes, against the directors of RNA Corp Pvt Ltd; Anubhav Agarwal, Gokul Agarwal, Sarang Agarwal and others. Sections 403, 420, 34 of the IPC and the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act (MOFA) have been leveled against the accused. The FIR says that the accused collected Rs 87,11,53,540 from 67 allottees but failed to give possession of flats, for nearly a decade. The FIR was subsequently transferred to the Economic Offenses Wing (EOW) of the Mumbai Police for further investigation.

When contacted, Assistant Police Inspector (API) Vikrant Shirsat of EOW told The Afternoon D&C that more FIRs are likely to be filed against the accused and no one will be spared. At present we are conducting a thorough inquiry into the matter, he added.

The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation’s building proposal issued IOD (Intimation of Disapproval) under section 346 of the BMC Act on September 7, 2006, and subsequently issued a commencement certificate on March 30, 2007, to the developer. Despite all the clearances, no construction was started in time.

The proposed composite project was titled as 'RNA Address' which was supposed to have 7 buildings with an area of 57,4945 sq. ft. comprising 294 premium apartments of 2 BHK, 3 BHK and other configurations. The total sales value of RNA Address was estimated at Rs 1,009 crore of which the developer sold units worth Rs 360.35 crore.

Yet the developer issued letters of allotment to the allottees, towards purchase of the flats. The allottees made payments ranging between 20% to 60% of the total purchase, based on the reminders of the developer. Besides the tripartite agreements were also executed and entered into between the allottees, the developer and the State Bank of India(SBI). In terms of the agreements, SBI sanctioned stipulated loan amounts in favour of individual allottees based on the guarantee provided by the developer in favor of SBI. The developer agreed to obtain the necessary permissions and register the ownership agreements, within twelve months of signing the agreement.

On May 11, 2012, the developer communicated to the allottees, that due to certain amendments in the Development Control Regulations of the BMC, the number of floors of 'RNA Address' have been reduced to 13 from earlier 15. As such the payment schedule stands revised.

In March 2013, the developer told the allottees that the third slab had been completed, but since the approval was obtained only for the construction up to the third slab, the work would remain suspended till additional approvals were obtained from the BMC.

Then on March 30, 2016, the developer obtained a fresh NOC from the Mumbai board of MHADA to commence work but again kept the work pending. When some of the allottees inquired with MHADA and the BMC about the delay, they were surprised to find out that since the developer did not make required payment, the approvals were held up.

As of now there is a plinth plus three storey structure in an absolute wretched condition at the site. Now some of the allottees have also submitted a petition to the National Consumer Redressal Forum, seeking justice. Repeated attempts to get version of the developer failed since RNA’s supposedly 'Corporate communication team' went on dodging the issue.

MMRDA has given permission to set up a multi-storey public car parking facility in a Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) building being constructed at Oshiwara, Goregaon West near Ram Mandir railway station to accommodate Project Affected People (PAP), without even conducting a feasibility study.

Ground plus seven floors are being constructed as part of “ RNA Exotica complex” which will be reserved for tenements to be constructed for the PAPs. Besides the public car parking facility will be set up from the 9tH to 18th floor. MMRDA has given permission for this car parking facility even without carrying out a feasibility test.

In reply to a query by RTI activist Sulaiman Bhimani, Rahul Pande, Public Information Officer and Deputy Town Planner, MMRDA, vide his letter No MMRDA/SRA Cell/30/17 dated 20 February 2017 replied that the information whether or not a feasibility test was carried out, before granting permission for the car parking is not available and if dissatisfied Bhimani may approach MMRDA’s appellate authority, SRA cell.

When contacted Additional MMRDA Commissioner Anil Wankhede told The Afternoon D & C, that the permission for public car parking facility has been granted, by clubbing it with slum rehabilitation project since the plot was reserved for the car parking. The decision was taken much earlier. But it is not clear why no feasibility study was conducted. Yet we will look into it, he added.

However Bhimani maintained that the permission for car parking was granted in haste by former MMRDA Commissioner Ratnakar Gaikwad before he became the Chief Secretary of Maharashtra, using his discretionary powers and malpractice in the deal was not ruled out. Basically the car parking on such a massive scale (for nearly 190 cars) is not feasible, because it will increase the load tremendously on the building. Besides, the cost will be Rs 300 per trip (ground to 18th floor and back). As such there will be no takers.

“The building is yet to be completed so the corrective action can always be taken to make better utilisation of 4 FSI granted. If the MMRDA does not amend its decision, we will have no option but to launch an agitation against this car parking which will be a “white-elephant” he added. When contacted RNA team preferred to dodge the query and did not furnish any reply.

is it feasible? A feasibility study evaluates the project's potential for success; therefore, perceived objectivity is an important factor in the credibility of the study for potential investors and lending institutions. The feasibility study involves taking a judgment call on whether a project is doable. The two criteria to judge feasibility are cost required and value to be delivered

Mumbai, 24 October, 2016: Ekta Group of builders cheats and bullies its customers – no two ways about it. Don't be fooled by clever PR campaigns, paid media, beautiful website, and estate agents. Don't get taken in by endorsements of reputed corporate like HDFC Realty, HDFC Red, or mentions in Magic Bricks Now. Don't get fooled by Anil Kapoor's endorsement and MCHI-Credai Awards for Customer Responsiveness. That's all smokescreen. The ground-reality is that Ekta Group, also known as Ekta World, is shamelessly unreliable. Booking a flat in an Ekta project means giving lakhs of rupees with no safeguards and no legal entitlements. Even when the flat-agreement is registered, it is an unfair, one-sided agreement that make you lose all your rights as a flat purchaser. Ekta builder's overall strategy is to make the buyer helpless. As they say in market language,"Builder ko haath kaatke de dene jaisa hai" -- like cutting off your hands and giving them to the builder!

Why are we making such harsh statements against a reputed builder? If you don't like long explanations, just read (1)brochure of Ekta Parksville and (2) flat-purchase agreement for Ekta Parksville. The brochure is full of rosy promises, whereas the sale agreement tells you that you have no rights and no legal entitlements at all. Builderka sab kuch, buyer ka kuch nahin!The agreement is nothing but bhai-giri made out in legal language. Investors who have got the point can stop reading and go look for other places to put their hard earned money. Others, who want explanations, can continue reading about the actual experience of a customer.

Five years ago, Vineet Malik of Gurgaon applied for a flat in Ekta Parksville project in Virar, at a price of Rs 26 lakhs. The first demand for payment by Ekta Parksville Homes Pvt. Ltd. came in November 2011. This amount was promptly paid. The verbal commitment given to him was that the flat would be delivered by December 2013 i.e. two years later.

Four years later, in November 2015, the last demand note was sent by Ekta Parksville Homes Pvt. Ltd. Although 95% of the total consideration had already been paid, the flat-purchase agreement was not yet signed. The buyer was at the builder's mercy; the builder could break the deal even now.

In March 2016, although the buyer had paid 97% of the total consideration, Ekta continued to refer to the deal as "provisional booking". See this indemnity bond given by the buyer.

In May 2016, finally, the Flat Purchase Agreement was registered. (MOFA requires registered agreement at the time of receiving 20% of the total consideration, but these builders are laws unto themselves!) The agreement was full of discriminatory clauses making the buyer renounce all his legal rights. In a nutshell, the agreement says that flat-owner is only the owner of the four walls of his house, and he has no say in the common amenities promised in the lavish brochure. (Even if the builder reduces any or all of the amenities, and exploits the FSI of the land and/or any common area of the building, the flat-owner must keep quiet! Is this the kind of agreement one expects from a reputed builder?)

According to the recently signed agreement, the promised date for giving possession is December 2016. But, judging from the current construction status, this promise will be broken. The entire site is under-construction; there is no way it can be completed for giving possession within two months. Buyers will be lucky to get possession even on December 2017!

These two pictures sum up the situation:

Ekta Parksville – What was promised

Ekta Parksville – What will be delivered in December 2016

In our next article, we will look at the discriminatory clauses in the flat-purchase Agreement which negate the lawful entitlements of the flat-purchaser.